IBM and Cisco have collaborated on a range of projects. One
interesting result of this meeting of minds is a new router from
Cisco called the CRS-1. This is a big device that encompasses
autonomic capabilities.

One possible weakness in the ODC project is that it is driven by
a vendor. This means that it might possibly be negatively affected
by that vendor's desire to "shift product." My own view is that the
future of computing is more driven by consideration of networking
and access to networking rather than processing power. However,
these comments must be viewed in the context of history, where
vendors have driven hugely successful technologies. Examples of
this include: Sun Microsystems and Java, Cisco and IP routing,
Microsoft and Windows, etc. So maybe the fact that just one
company is pushing ODC isn't such a bad thing. On the other hand,
ODC is a new way of producing and using software. This might well
require buy-in from many other vendors, and this is not guaranteed
to occur.

Conclusions

We've briefly reviewed a range of potentially powerful new
technologies. The integrative aspect of ODC is compelling--it
takes existing technologies, standards, and specifications and
merges these into a wholly new way of running IT. In conjunction
with grid computing, it can be seen that ODC is conceptually
similar to the global outsourcing phenomenon. The telecom world
offers historical precedent for the power of outsourcing such
arcane areas as MPLS an VPN management. Organizations can save cash
and focus on core activities by offloading these complex
technologies from the LAN and into the hands of highly trained and
increasingly cash-strapped service providers.

Whether or not ODC takes off as per IBM's vision, other vendors
are attempting similar initiatives; Oracle has added grid
capability to its Oracle 10g product. Again, history teaches that
out of the technology wars there is generally a clear winner to
lead the next revolution--Microsoft won the desktop war. It's
likely that we will see an ODC winner emerge. What's interesting
about this is that no single company has led two consecutive waves
of revolution--Microsoft is now no longer seen as the innovation
leader (its stock even pays dividends now as it accepts its
position as an established brand holder!) and its forays into
telecom and gaming could even be seen as solutions looking for a
problem.

My own take on ODC is that it is very necessary. One benefit I'd
like to see it deliver is simpler systems. This is no longer a
matter of choice given the risk-related volatility of this first
decade of the twenty-first century. The world may well have a sufficient
amount of programmers engaged in producing the thousands of packages that
feed the global market for technology. Perhaps a fresh approach is
needed for the form and function of much of this software? It's
possible that ODC can deliver this.